Daschle: First Lady not Commander in Chief
Tom Daschle, telling it like it is on Meet the Press:
I know what a good First Lady she was, but it would be hard for me to draw some degree of connection between being a First Lady and having experience to be the Commander in Chief. [...]She served in the Senate, she's been on the Armed Services Committee and I give her credit for that, but in terms of numbers of years of elected office, the number of years served, Barack Obama has more years served than Hillary Clinton. [...]
So it's a specious argument. The fact is, both of them are qualified. They're good candidates. They both would make great leaders. I do believe that Barack offers a lot more in the capacity of leadership, but I don't think anyone can look at her experience as First Lady and say, for some reason, that qualifies her to run for President of the United States.
Specious.
Advertisement
Comments
I think it is very difficult to discount HRC's first lady experience without coming off as sexist and Obama's camp is just now figuring out how to deal with it. At the same time, her claims that as first lady she brought peace to Northern Ireland, ended the Rwandan crisis, etc. are delusional at best but more likely gross and intentional distortions. Thankfully, in terms of the Northern Ireland deal, people like John Hume and George Mitchell are coming out and saying her claims are "silly" and she was "not directly involved", respectively.
Posted by: Paul | March 10, 2008 6:44 AM